with the general rendering of the Hebrew verb, which, according to Parkhurst, signifies to finish, to complete, and also, to be finished, to be completed.

For a short work shall be done, instead of, for that that is determined shall be done. The noun here, which we translate a short work, is in other places rendered, in the common translation, determined; as in Daniel ix. 26, 27. The verb, or root, whence it is derived, is also rendered to determine, or to decree. Parkhurst has pointed out to us translations, by the Apostle Paul, of both the root and the noun; so that, on his authority, all doubt respecting their meaning is removed. The passage, Paul translates, is in Isaiah x. 22, 23 :-" The consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness. For the Lord God of Hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, in the midst of all the land." The translation is in Romans ix. 28:"For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness; because a short work (λóyov ovvtetμnuévov) will the Lord make upon the earth.”

Verse 37.

Conjugal affection, instead of the desire of women. We adopt this change, upon a critical illustration of Bishop Newton. He remarks on the terms here-"The word in the original for women signifieth wives."* In a note to the passage, he adds, "there is no other word used in the original for wives, above once or twice in the whole Scrip

*Dissert. xvii.

tures." He observes, in the same place, that " the word in the original for desire, doth signify conjugal affection," and gives, in the note, as instances of this, Canticles vii. 10, and Ezekiel xxiv. 16.

Verse 38.

We have proposed several very important alterations in this verse, which, we think, we can most clearly explain, and shew good reasons for, by presenting them a little out of the order in which they occur in the verse.

Our

For his establishment, instead of in his estate. translators, in place of in his estate, have given, in the margin, in his seat. Parkhurst, for the noun, which they have thus translated, gives the senses establishment, post, or office; and refers to instances of this meaning, which is in entire consistency with the sense of the verb or root. We have a clear instance of the meaning of the root, in 2d Samuel vii. 12, 13. "When thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever." y is the particle here rendered in, by our translators. This is a sense of it so unusual, at least, that it does not occur in the long catalogue of meanings given by Parkhurst. For, on account of, for the sake of, are common meanings of the term.

Costly stones, instead of precious stones. In our language, precious stones imply small crystallized stones, or gems, that may be set in jewels; but these are not what are expressed in the original. The terms here, in Daniel,

are those employed in the description of the stones of Solomon's temple, in the First Book of Kings, chapter vii. verses 10, 11:-" The foundation was of costly stones, even great stones, stones of ten cubits, and stones of eight cubits. And above were costly stones, after the measure of hewed stones." The terms in Daniel are in the singular number, and those in 1st Kings in the plural; but this circumstance, it will be readily allowed, does not affect the proof, derived from the terms of 1st Kings, of what is meant in Daniel.

He shall honour fortresses to God; and to God whom his fathers knew not he shall honour them, instead of shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour.

Our translators have given, in the margin, several other translations of the first clause here, or of some of the terms of it, of which we proceed to take notice. Instead of, shall he honour the God of forces, they give, in the margin, the Almighty God he shall honour. Instead of forces, they again give, in the margin, munitions. Then again, in the margin, they give the Hebrew term, which they have translated forces, in Roman characters, and translate it God's protectors. All the doubts and difficulties which beset them, as is clearly indicated by these various schemes of translation, appear to us to have chiefly arisen from their not adhering here to the common meaning of the term, which they have translated forces. is that term; and its sense can be proved from many examples to be- not forces, but fortresses, strong holds,-or munitions, according to one of their own marginal readings in this place. When we adopt the meaning fortresses, all the other terms pre

sent themselves, along with it, in a grammatical order; and the sense of the whole is sufficiently plain,-with, perhaps, the exception of the expression, to honour fortresses; and that cannot be held obscure, or in any way remarkable, when we look at the conclusion of this verse, and find they are to be honoured with gold, and with silver, and with costly stones, and with precious things. The proofs, that O means fortresses, are uniform and full. The term occurs in its singular form in Judges vi. 26 :-" Build an altar unto the Lord thy God upon the top of this strong place." Dr. Horsley has translated the term, in its same singular form, three times by fortress, in the xxiii. chapter of Isaiah, namely, in the 4th, 11th, and 14th verses; where the context clearly shews the fortress, or stronghold, of Tyre is meant.* In the 7th and 10th verses of this xi. chapter of Daniel, the same singular noun is translated fortress; and, in the 19th verse, fort. In the immediately succeeding 39th verse, it occurs in the same plural form, as here in this 38th verse, and has, along with it, in the construct state, a term signifying walls; to which we will soon advert. The proof is thus full, that the meaning is not forces, but fortresses. It is true, that Parkhurst has, in his dictionary, devoted one paragraph to the plural noun as it occurs here; but merely to notice the marginal reading in the Bible, God's protectors, and Bishop Newton's conjectural illustration of that reading, and to present some other conjectures; for the paragraph gives no new legitimate criticism, to bring additional light

*Bibl. Crit. in loco.

on the term.

Adhering then to the translation fortresses, the other terms of the passage, along with it, have a clear

מעזים

enough order and construction. On is governed by 125, he shall honour, and both the terms for God have the dative prefix, .-The repetition of 25, in the second clause, implies that is again understood as its object; and we supply it by the pronoun them.

One result of this criticism is, that we must consider the second clause of this 38th verse as containing a repetition, with additional circumstances, of the sense contained in the first clause; but all know that similar repetitions are quite common in the Hebrew writings.

Verse 39.

And he shall do like things to walled fortresses, instead of thus shall he do in the most strong holds. We have already noticed, that there is an exception, here, to the Hebrew connective particle requiring only and, as a satisfactory translation. Here it is not apparent what the king shall do to walled fortresses, until we look at the coupling of this clause with the preceding verse, and inquire what he should do to the fortresses mentioned in it; when we perceive he should honour them with gold, and with silver, and with costly stones, and with precious things. It becomes plain then, that the connective here implies something more than we express by and. It may indeed be rendered here, as in the common translation, thus. An example of the use of the connective, joined with the very verb here before us, and clearly implying that something was done, like what was immediately before expressed, is